Read JLA/AVENGERS with that in mind, and I think you will be able to figure out for yourself what I didn't like about it!

I hope I'm not the only one who was totally disappointed with the story .

The only objective was to cram as many characters into the book as possible. Even the art seemed rushed and I am a huge Perez fan. Not sure if it was the inking , but every character seemed to have a "button" nose.

It's a shame the original story never got to see print. Sometimes less is more.

Doug...take a look at these 2 pics...again..just my opinion..but look at the differences between Superman , Thor , Aquaman , etc...Again , i just felt the overall art was not up to par.

Whoops...here is the other image.

••

Monster Island being so closely associated with the Avengers, of course. . .

See what I mean?

••

Busiek is one of those fans-turned-pro who continues to present himself, in person and thru his work, as "one of us" for the fans. I, on the other hand, constantly emphasize that the fan-think is the first thing that should go out the window when one turns pro. Fans, in many cases, don't like to hear that.

Again, Len Wein: "The first story you would do as a fan should be the last story you'd do as a pro."

I LOVED the JLA/Avengers comics.

Somehow it felt more like a DC book at the time then a Marvel book.

Marvel were in their Nu Marvel mode full steam by then. The only thing they had which was close to resemble/have a simlilar old school flavor at the time of the JLA/Avengers comic by then was the Thunderbolts by Nicieza/Grummet if I recall correctly.

JLA/Avengers was a FUN comic.... and I for one am glad it was made.

It is a comic that ANY Busiek/Perez/Avengers/JLA/Marvel/DC fan SHOULD own.

Heck I would have been tempted to say any "comic fan".... but too many comic fans are embarassed by/loathe super-hero comics.... so I won't say it.

But it was a FUN comic with some GREAT Perez artwork. That alone was worth the price of admission.

My ONE and ONLY regret.... is not owning the Oversize Absolute edition. :(

Now if you will excuse me.... I will be busy crying in the corner for a while. :(

My copy of the absolute oversized edition just arrived in the mail today, coincidentally.

(I bought it on eBay). I probably like it for all the reasons people have for not liking the current state of the comic book industry.

Maybe it is held in such high regard when compared to the completely substandard Marvel vs DC miniseries that took fanboy-ism to a new level by letting readers vote on the outcome.

Popularity contests let Storm beat Wonder Woman, for instance. Catering to the fans to the 10th degree, and DC/Marvel didn't have the courtesy to put top tier creators on the project either.

It seemed like they were hardly trying.

Doug...take a look at these 2 pics...again..just my opinion..but look at the differences between Superman , Thor , Aquaman , etc...Again , i just felt the overall art was not up to par

***************

You're asking him to compare two pieces of art that were drawn 20 years apart. OF COURSE they are going to look different. George's style has grown in that time. ( Apparantly, to your dissatifaction.) Would you rather artists' work just stagnate and look the same for ever and ever?

••

It's been a long time since crossovers were permitted to occupy the same reality. Marvel got a whole miniseries out of it, remember?

••

I was thinking about this earlier. Thru the magic of hindsight, I'd probably have used the original Avengers and the original JLA, set in a non-specific time period. Have the JLA go to New York to check out the Avengers, since the latter group has a dangerous monster -- the Hulk -- as one of their "members".

Sure, some fans would have been ticked off that the book wasn't about the most current members, or, more likely, every single member -- but a wise man once said you can't please everybody!

••

On behalf of artists everywhere, may I suggest you don't ask for that sketch. Let George offer, or let it pass.

"Bear in mind that the second Perez image above was NOT for the
JLA/Avengers that published this decade, it was a recreation of the aborted
1983 crossover cover, meaning not meant for publication. Also, it appears
to me that the recreation was drawn at a smaller dimension than the
original. I wouldn't be looking at the quality of the second work too harshly. "

Vinny; I believe Perez did some recreation of that piece. But the second image posted is from the JLA/Avengers issue #3 page 12. ;)

Dan James; I am green with envy. I HAVE to ask... How much did you pay for it?? (No you don't have to answer)

"In one thing I read, Kurt said he wrote this series as a farewell for fans
because NuMarvel was changing the way comics were being written. "

Kip Lewis; That does not surprise me in the least.... that is exactly how it felt reading the comics. Agreed... it was not perfect... but damn how it was fun. I had a similar feeling reading the New Teen titans; Games OGN lately.

My biggest complaint about the series is that it felt so cluttered -- like Busiek couldn't decide which characters to use, which versions of the teams to go with, which previous story lines to ripoff pay homage to.  So he just went with everything.

I found the series to be a great deal of fun, in the sense that it WAS such an epic exercise in fan-think. So many conundrums, inside jokes, comparisions, etc... It's exactly was many fans would try to do themselves if given such a book to work on.

Overall, I found the characterizations to be solid, but the friction between the two continuums grew a bit thick sometimes, as each team perceived the other to be somehow intrinsically opposed to them, almost a take on Morrison's "Earth 2" novel that he did with Quitely.

All that being said, I would have preferred the single universe approach. What we got didn't rankle my nerves too much, but it was simply "more of the same" with the cosmic scale, the multiverses, the constant "reboots" altering the timeline...

It felt more "DC" because DC's stock-in-trade at the time this was published was again, through constant fan-think, exactly this sort of multiversal rigamorale... Parallel universes, counterparts upon counterparts, constants reboots and restarts rejiggering the timeline and altering everyone's memories and perceptions...

Using the parallel dimension trope to explain why the two teams had never met was really the easy way out for the writer. Making this their "first" encounter ever made it easy to play all of his long-held cards without acknowledging any of the other team-ups or having to come up with reasons for why the world's two premiere super-teams interact with one another so rarely.

Also, the plot begins to write itself once you show that there are two universes... Obviously, they must be in opposition... Perhaps in danger of colliding... The big gun villains in the two universes, perhaps they have plans dependent upon there being two worlds...

With that, the way into the story becomes the whole story.

In one of the rejiggered timelines shown in the book, the teams have always co-existed on the same Earth and are shown having a JLA/JSA style get-together aboard the satellite, trading quips and conversation as if they were all long-standing acquaintances rather than wary, hostile strangers bent on defending their home dimensions from odd-seeming alien invaders.

Oh, to have had the whole thing take place in that briefly-glimpsed reality...

The Roger Stern/Steve Rude book is up there with JB's Batman/Captain America as far as crossovers done right go.

Avengers/JLA was a bit like "I'm clever, just look at my knowledge of these universes".  It really did throw in everything and the kitchen sink and got kind of bogged down in parts.  Lovely art by Perez though.

••

The only thing worse than fan-wankery is fan-wankery that overtly calls attention to itself.

••

"The first story you'd do as a fan. . . "

Take the X-men/Teen Titans crossover. Great story, but unless you
already know about Darkseid and the Dark Phoniex saga, you won't get
the whole story.
************************

Not necessarily. I had no idea who Darkseid was, but it didn't take long to figure out that he was a major DC villain and what his motivation was. I didn't need to know everything about him to follow the story.

I do agree that these type of crossovers are not a good way to introduce a new reader  to the DC and Marvel universes.

Wasp: “Calamari is squid.”

She-Hulk: “Who cares!?”

Civilian woman to Scarlet Witch: “You with the JSA? You’re too old to be Titans!” (No response.)

Nothing. (The closest you get is two people on Paradise Island (where everyone’s a woman) exclaiming stuff like ”Great Hera!” into the air in the same panel.)

Nothing. Two whole books in a row of nothing!

Lana Lang hands over to Lois Lane on some news broadcast. (Lois doesn’t say anything.)

Scarlet Witch: “Green on Alpa Quadrant. Green on Beta Quadrant ... New readings ...”

Wonder Woman: “You’re very focused, Wanda.”

Scarlet Witch: “Yes. I’ll be fine as long as I have something to do.”

Wonder Woman: “We’ve got them on the run.”

Someone whom I can’t even make out who she is: “Yes, and –”

Wasp: “Wait! At the Citadel! What’s –”

Wasp: “Wanda, does what I’m seeing mean what I fear it does?”

Scarlet Witch: “It’s ... bad. I’m trying to reach into the chaos-field – bring more of us through. Keep more of them out – but Jan, I can tell ... we’re almost out of time ...!”

She-Hulk: “Hey, Star-Shorts! Thought I might hang, in case you get bored. We could talk girl talk – you know, ass-kicking, name-taking, like that.”

Wonder Woman: “Aye, and I stand with you as well, daughter. I ... am honered. And I thank you. Forward, then – for the glory of Gaea!”

Wasp: “Sho how’re we doing, Wanda?”

Scarlet Witch: “It’s hard ... hard to tell! I think ... we’re blocking Krona from bringing more reinforcements, but ... there may only be seconds left ...”

I've touched on my dislike of this miniseries before, and each time this topic comes up I go back and re-read it but the thing doesn't age well.

Busiek is supposed to be almost an historian with his knowledge of Marvel characters yet he completely doesn't understand how Thor's hammer works. Mjolnir hits with its own devastating magical impact regardless of who wields it. If Thor was able to tag Superman with it, which would require Superman not to use his super-speed to easily avoid getting hit, than Mjolnir would knock Superman unconscious. At the very least Superman would always be vulnerable to Mjolnir's magical impacts and would not be able to simply block a full-strength blow with the palm of his hand.

The rest of the miniseries is a mediocre, boring, paint-by-numbers story that feels like anyone could have written. It's such an obvious and predictable read that the only surprises in the story are things Busiek threw in that are out of of character, don't make sense, or simply don't work.

Krona killing Galactus and doing so, easily with no repercussions?? Captain America and Superman being judgemental pricks to each other? Green Lantern charging his ring from Cosmic Cube?

This whole cross-over is such a phenomenally mediocre waste of George Perez's stunning pencils that it's heart-breaking.

••

Being actually ABLE to hit him is, of course, the key problem, but I have said for years -- nay, DECADES -- that if Thor was actually able to hit Superman with Mjolnir, it would be like one very strong guy hitting another very strong guy -- WITH A SLEDGEHAMMER.

++

Krona killing Galactus…

••

Galactus, of course, being so closely associated with the Avengers. . .

I agree with the comment that you didn't need to know who Darkseid was for the X-Men / Teen Titans to work. I'd never read the Teen Titans either and enjoyed the book loads.

In fact, after that came out, I went on a Teen Titans scavanger hunt for the back issues.

 It would be like reading about Batman
meeting Sherlock Holmes without knowing who Holmes is. You
wouldn't get why it's special.

I think Mike Barr and Alan Davis did this in their run on Detective Comics.

While Perez might be a bit awkward on dialogue, but he's an excellent plotter/co-plotter. His New Titans stuff was crammed with panels with very good character bits and interactions. And when he works with writers who play to that and give him room to do that, he works wonders.

The New Titans: Games GN for instance, the Wolfman script was ... par for the course, but what Perez did with it visually and narratively was breathtaking.

I was a bit disappointed with JLA/Avengers myself, and it was mainly that there was so much "over-plot" crammed and not as much of the standard Perez character-stuff that I remember.

I think, just guessing here, that it might have to do with writers starting to write "Perez pages" with 20 panels and then expecting the magic to happen. I would think that the best way to write for Perez would be to write a tight plot, with some dialogue, for a story with 6-panel pages and letting Perez work over that.

Just like a penciller might want to provide looser pencils for inkers like Tom Palmer, Klaus Janson or Kevin Nowlan in order to leave them room to do what they do so well, I imagine that with a penciller/storyteller like George Perez, a looser plot (with enough room for Perez to expand the story his way) would be better.

I don't know how Busiek and Perez worked on JLA/Avengers, but I wish it had a much tighter focus on the core team members and had shown some good character bits there.

++

I think Mike Barr and Alan Davis did this in their run on Detective Comics.

••

As I recall, there were legal reasons DC could not actually identify Holmes in that story.

••

And yet the first one did precisely that! Remember the "We Now Pause for Hero Identification" pages? Today, I am sure, those would have caused much foaming at the mouth from anal fans who would claim to be insulted by any suggestion that they did not already know who Superman and Spider-Man were -- and that anyone who didn't should go read a few hundred back issues and CATCH UP!

In fact, when I did DARKSEID vs GALACTUS I included similar pages, to bring up to speed what I knew would be very narrowly focused Marvel and DC fans, and when he read the plot, Mark Gruenwald originally told me to take out those pages, as "Everybody knows who these guys are."

Everybody? DC and Marvel were smart enough to assume that not EVERYBODY would know who Superman and Spider-Man were, but Mark thought everybody would know Darkseid and Galactus?

Alas, that is the kind of myopic thinking that was beginning to show itself more and more in comics -- and of which JLA/AVENGERS is the worst example.

(Hm. Hold on that. KINGDOM COME might be the worst. I seem to recall page after page after page in which no one is called by name.)

"Superman allows himself to be hit in order to get some measure
of an opponent's power levels. "

That certainly contradicts the Superman I grew up on. He might allow himself to get hit by common thugs if he needs to get the point across that he's invulnerable, but hitting him is like punching solid steel. A hard punch would crush the bones in his opponent's hand if he was just a regular guy.

The Superman I knew would go out of his way to stop people from getting hurt, even criminals. He pulled his punches, he kept track of every bullet bouncing off his chest and he would quickly roll with a punch sometimes to prevent the other guy from getting hurt (especially as Clark Kent).

And letting himself get hit to gauge someone's strength? If the other guy was strong enough to punch him through a building, that would be putting bystanders at risk.

If he was sure that the other guys couldn't knock him off his feet, he might let them hit him so they'd wear themselves out (rope-a-dope-style), but intentionally taking a hit for other reasons? No. Doesn't make sense.

It's often been portrayed as a failing in Superman's enemies (and especially in Luthor) that they view him as all muscle and as somebody who rushes in, expecting his powers and invulnerability to save him). That was a recurring motif from the '50s to now. And the really good writers (no matter how corny the stories may seem to modern readers) made a point of it that a lot of the time Superman defeated his enemies not by being stronger than them, but by being smarter.

I'm not saying that he had a higher IQ than Luthor, Brainiac et al. or even a comparable level of super-intelligence, but he managed to identify their weaknesses and outwit them. Often precisely because they underestimated him.

And a Superman whose idea of testing his opponent is to let him have the first punch, seems both more macho and more of a musclehead than I'm used to. It seems more like Luthor's view of him has been embraced by the writers.

Maybe that's a bit harsh, maybe it's part of a larger idea of Superman where it makes sense that he would just let people punch him without having an idea about how strong they are. But my gut reaction is "nope". It just doesn't feel right.

"(It is more likely he lets himself get hit, like by the hammer, so nothing else gets hits because he dodged it.)"

That, I agree with. He might let himself get hit to protect somebody else. It's just the idea of letting himself get hit to get the measure of somebody else's strength that doesn't seem right.

If somebody lands a punch on Superman that sends him flying, it's because  this other guy was too fast, sucker-punched him or was much stronger than expected.

Was that with the roll of  12 or 16 sided dice?

"Right -but if the Hulk can withstand Thor's hammer, shouldn't Superman be able to as well? "

You're missing the difference. The Hulk has a high degree of invulnerability. This invulnerability is not affected by magic and therefore does not go away when he's hit by Mjolnir.

Superman has a higher degree of invulnerability. It does go away when he gets hit by Thor's hammer, and therefore hitting Superman with Mjolnir is the same as hitting Batman with Mjolnir.

(Magic hammer = no degree of invulnerability beyond that of a normal human, for superman.)

••

Is this really the right usage of this term? I see it cropping up a lot in discussions of continuity intensive stories, but given the source of the term -- ie, Easter egg hunts: a search for something that is hidden -- it seems like what is being referenced is more akin to a "secret handshake". You don't have to be a "member of the club" in order to participate in an Easter egg hunt. You DO in order to catch all these reference.

++

…but the basic story still comes down to two teams from different worlds fighting against each other before teaming up to take down a common foe. How's that any more hard to grasp than any other superhero comic?

••

"Come down to" is the key phrase, and the point upon which JLA/AVENGERS stumbles. There is an awful lot of superfluous fan-wankery to wade thru before that "basic story" comes to center stage. Compare this to the original SUPERMAN/SPIDER-MAN, or SUPERMAN/HULK, or my own BATMAN/CAPTAIN AMERICA, and note how soon the "basic story" gets started in those volumes, compared to JLA/AVENGERS.

••

As I have mentioned many times, that is the kind of fan-think that really makes me nutz. The way, at Cons, whenever discussions of cross-company crossovers would come up, the fans would so often go straight to the same/same meeting. Hawkeye vs Green Arrow. Mister Fantastic vs Plastic Man. Asgardians vs New Gods. Etc.

We know, of course, that Tarzan and the Phantom are not (or should not be) in the same jungle, but immediately to my mind the story is better if NEITHER of them are in the jungle. If the meeting happens while, for some reason, both are in New York, or London, or Outer Mongolia. Get them out of their familiar turf and see how well they do.

••

Precisely.

I think I remember one pre-Crisis storyline that said Superman was more vulnerable to magic than the average human and Zantanna, I believe, theorized that it was because as a Kryptonian growing in a science only world, they were less resistant or something with magic. I think they were going for the idea like when Europeans brought illnesses to the New World that were far more devestating to Native American populations than they were to European populations. Weird take, but it was someone's view.

Very weird. Wouldn't that mean Superman could get a magic vaccine? ;)

I've offered this before but it seems the question still needs to be answered: Yes Mjolnir does indeed hit with it's own magical force of impact. There are several Thor comics from the 70's and 80's and 90's which reveal this. Not only does Mjolnir hit with its own magical force, the evidence suggests it hits harder than Thor himself does, i.e. it hurts more to get by Mjolnir than by Thor.

There is a late 70's/early 80's tale where Loki is wearing the gloves that allow anyone to pick up Mjolnir, and he easily batters Thor unconscious with the hammer. (All I remember about the creative team of this issue is that John Buscema pencilled it)

There's a late 80's early 90's tale from the Tom Defalco/Ron Frenz run where Captain America is dog-piled by about 30 Asgardian Trolls, and his only hope of survival is Thor's hammer which is lying on the ground within his reach. Cap grasps Mjolnir, and with one swing of his arm every troll is immediately sent flying off of him with stunned look of pain on their faces. Cap hands Mjolnir back to Thor and comments upon what a fine and powerful weapon it truly is.

There was an Avengers story around the time of the end of Roger Stern's run and the beginning of Walt simonson's so I can't remember who wrote it, but in this story the Avengers are doing some combat training like the X-men in their danger-room and the Wasp's sting accidentally strikes Thor's hand that he's holding Mjolnir in which knocks it from Thor's grasp directly towards the She-Hulk. To save herself She-hulk grabs Captain America's shield and when the hammer hits the shield it still knocks she-hulk on her ass. And this was simply from the hammer accidentally being knocked from Thor's hand, not from Thor actually throwing it with any of his strength behind it.

There was also an early 80's Hulk comic from Bill Mantlo's run with Sal Buscema during the time they had Bruce Banner controlling the Hulk, and in this story (with the Avengers guest-appearing) the Hulk is fighting Thor and they've exchanged several blows already and then Thor lands a blow with Mjolnir and as the Hulk is sent flying through the air he thinks to himself how every time he's struck by Mjolnir it always hurts. (he was able to stand toe-to-toe against Thor trading blows but once Mjolnir is brought into it he's sent flying and definitely feeling the pain.)

Although this next theory is just that, only a theory, a case could be made that one of Mjolnir's enchantments could simply be that it will always strike a powerfully painful/devastating blow regardless of whom it is striking.

Many's the time Thor has thrown his hammer at some supremely powerful cosmic being like Galactus and these being always prevent the hammer from actually striking them, usually with some sort of forcefield. It could be argued they do this because they are arrogant don't deem to let a puny creature that is beneath them to affront their personage, or because if the hammer actually strikes them it will cause them devastating pain.

During Roger Stern's Avengers vs Olympus story-line Thor lands a blow with Mjolnir upon an enraged Zeus and Zeus really loses it, the implication being this blow really hurt him (Zeus).

Regardless of the theory, Marvel's Thor has a long-established history of showing that Thor's hammer does hit with it's own magical force of impact.

"That was my biggest gripe about the Silver Age Martian Manhunter.  His "vulnerability" to fire was so extreme he would literally faint if someone lit a cigarette across the street from where he was walking.  That's just silly.  He should be vulnerable to fire like anyone else, that's it."
* * *

When I had a newborn baby at home, I used to joke with my wife that a plastic bag anywhere in the same room with the baby could be fatal.  "They're like kryptonite to her."

I was purposely misunderstanding the relationship between plastic bags and babies when I made those comments.  Unfortunately, many comics writers seem to treat their characters' weaknesses exactly that way.

Thus, fire is Martian Manhunter's kryptonite.  The color yellow is Green Lantern's kryptonite.  Someone brandishing a gun is Batman's kryptonite.  Laughter is Spock's kryptonite.  Etc.

Is Superman's heat vision made from wood? Because that's the only way we can be sure it would get past the ring's protective forcefield.

If the ring is powered, it has a forcefield and the question becomes: Can Superman's heat vision penetrate a forcefield created with Alan Scott's ring? If it is depowered, unprotected and melts, it would probably be just about as powerless as any piece of metalic slag.

••

Seems like I have heard that justification far too many times in the past few years. Or is that decades?

JLA Avengers is the best comic book ever published period.

My dad can beat up your dad.

"As to whether he could penetrate a forcefield generated by the ring while it's being used, that's a different topic. "

No, it isn't. If a ring is powered, it will (at least in modern interpretations) protect itself. If a "laser" (i.e, heatvision) is blasted at it, it will use its power to protect itself, presumably with a forcefield.

If it is not powered, and unless it is made from a metal that is impervious even to the heat of the sun (which is unlikely), Superman's heat vision should be able to completely vaporize it if necessary.

Now, somehow the ring is "programmed", and in order to say that it can still function in melted form, that programming must be completely separate from any physical structure or circuitry within the ring.

The question of whether Superman's heat vision can melt a Green Lantern ring is exactly the same question as whether his heat vision can penetrate a Green Lantern's forcefield.

Unless it becomes the question of what it takes to melt a Green Lantern ring in a fully depowered state. Where the answer might be that a simple blacksmith's forge can do it.

And the question of whether a melted ring can still be used to harness lantern energy, is dependent on how the ring works. If we presume that the metal is just a rare metal capable of storing lantern energy and that its programming exists as pure lantern energy, separate from any physical "computer" technology in the ring, then the metal in any shape would retain that ability. 

Yet there has to be some way that the "programming" controls the ability of the metal to harness and direct lantern energy, or anyone stumbling on a raw piece of the metal would have access to lantern power.

So in some way that would either have to mean that A) the ring can never be fully depowered, as it needs to retain its programming in lantern energy form, as well as its basic self-defense mechanisms,(in which case it could be melted but reshape itself, evade the heat or protect itself with a forcefield) or B) There is actual circuitry in the ring that controls its programming, so that even in a fully depowered, fully drained state it can be recharged and retain all its memory and programming. Meaning that if it is sufficiently melted, it would be useless.

So it's actually pretty involved. But in pragmatic terms I'd say that if the ring was wielded (against its will) by a villain, Superman might melt it or make it so hot the villain takes it off. If it was wielded by a good guy Green Lantern, I'd say not.

Superman gettiing in a fight with a Green Lantern and using his heat vision to melt the ring sounds like a "My favorite superhero is cooler than your favorite superhero" story that should never be told. 

Steve Horn wrote: Those that criticze the JLA/Avengers have never read the JLA/Avengers.  JLA Avengers is the best comic book ever published period.

Since you've called out pretty much anyone who has even an ounce of criticism for the book, care to explain why you think JLA/Avengers is "the best comic book ever published period"?

"Like I said I was basing my answer on that Scott's ring had to be forged so therefore could be melted.  Am I wrong?"

As far as I recall, there was a Secret Origins story  Post Crisis that revealed that Alan Scott's Green Lantern was not a mystical artifact as originally established, but a lantern that belonged to a previous sector 2814 Lantern who went bad and became a tyrant. But rather than confront him themselves, they turned his ring's vulnerability from yellow to wood so that his subjects could defeat him with sticks.

In the process, the ring and Lantern were (I think) broken and reforged, which I believe was justification for it not sending Alan Scott to Oa to meet the Guardians, the way a Lantern usually would.

That might have changed in the 20-25 years since that story was told, but immediately after Crisis on Infinite Earths, Alan Scott's ring and Lantern came from OA but it lacked the Corps programming and was vulnerable only to wood because of the incidents described above.

Interpreting that in light of the question posed, it may be a possibility that the ring will retain it's power to harness Lantern energy after being melted or otherwise damaged (and might be reshaped with willpower), but that melting it might damage its "programming" and "memory banks". Which would then be a function of the physical ring, not the lantern energy. Unless the thousands of inactive years with low energy reserves is what caused the programming to become corrupt.

QUOTE: As far as I recall, there was a Secret Origins story  Post Crisis that revealed that Alan Scott's Green Lantern was not a mystical artifact as originally established, but a lantern that belonged to a previous sector 2814 Lantern who went bad and became a tyrant. But rather than confront him themselves, they turned his ring's vulnerability from yellow to wood so that his subjects could defeat him with sticks.

 Alan's ring and Lantern were forged from the Starheart, which was the mystical energy of the universe that the Guardians had gathered together to destroy so the Universe would become more "science" oriented. The Starheart crashed on Earth. The GL in question was somehow merged with the Starheart. I think this was a way to explain why Alan Scott has the same ring/lantern combo as the Corps.